Tuesday, August 05, 2008

A White lie?

Is it permissible for a public servant to tell a white lie?

If you ask a child what a white lie is; you will find that
"small" lies are white lies. If you lie about stealing a piece
of gum, it is a white lie.

And they are wrong.

According to the standard of conduct that the leadership
of the APS enforces upon 89,000 of our sons and daughters;

a white lie is a "lie" that can be ethically justified.

On the order of; "lying" to your grandmother about how
much you enjoyed her pumpkin pie.

The test;
again according to the APS Student Standard of Conduct
If the person to whom you lied, finds out about the lie,
would they feel you had lied in their best interest.

Clearly, we are talking about a different standard of conduct than "the law".

A white lie, under the law, is pretty much any thing your
lawyers are willing to litigate; and they are willing to
litigate any thing.

Which bring us to;

Should public servants be held accountable to
a higher standard of conduct than the law; the lowest
acceptable standard of conduct in our society?
Because public service is smothered in direct references
to accountability to a higher standard of conduct,

most people believe that public servants are accountable
to a higher standard of conduct than the law.

They are not.

Under the law, APS and Modrall cannot be compelled to obey
the law
which requires them to
"... discharge ETHICALLY
the high responsibilities of public service."
New Mexico State Statute 10-16-b-3


Should we hold public servants accountable to a higher
standard of conduct than the law?

I would argue yes.

Because we are required to trust them.

If they are asking for our trust, we are entitled to hold
them accountable, at the very least, to a standard of
conduct that requires trustworthiness.

The leadership of the APS will not hold themselves
accountable to a standard of conduct that requires
trustworthiness.

If they could actually be held honestly accountable
to a standard of conduct that required trustworthiness,

we would be able to hold them accountable for being
untrustworthy;
  • by refusing to answer legitimate questions about the
    public interests and about their public service, and
  • by refusing to begin an impartial full scale audit of the
    administration of the public trust and treasure
    by the leadership of the APS, and
  • by their steadfast and unrelenting refusal do be candid,
    forthright, and honest with stakeholders,
    in any form of town hall meeting.
We cannot hold them accountable to any standard of
conduct that requires trustworthiness,
and which provides honest accountability for untrustworthiness.

The leadership of the APS in unaccountable to any standard
of conduct at all,
except under circumstances that they
control.


We could hold them accountable personally,
but only by a large enough demonstration.

There is some number of people, which if they demanded
in person, an immediate full scale audit of the entire APS,

they would see their demand met.


If you think an audit is in your interests,
you will need to defend your interests.

There is a need for you to stand up for what you believe in.

You can do that by participating in a demonstration
coincident with the next school board public forum;
Wednesday, August 6, 2008, at 5pm.

In the million dollar Susie Rayos Marmon Boardroom
that your tax dollars bought.

And in the administrative offices at 6400 Uptown Blvd.

You should see what they done with the place.


The more people that participate in the demonstration
the more likely it is that there will be an audit
that will end corruption and incompetence in the
administration of the APS.

There is no legitimate agenda that does not move forward
on the day that the audit begins.

It is a threat only to the corrupt and the incompetent
in the leadership of the APS.

They win if you do nothing.

I am not saying these people are evil,
but when Edmund Burke wrote;
"All that is necessary for evil to prevail in the world,
is for good men to do nothing."
these are the people he was writing about.

You can do nothing;
or you can at the very least, go to the meeting.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure it's the Board.
The Board is about a bunch of political plays and isn't about educating children. They're ALWAYS posturing about/towards their specific constituent groups and could care less (and do) about how APS does/works as a whole.
APS Administration has two parts: Business and Education.
Business Admin is under extreme pressure already and is making (albeit slow) steps to correct the problem created by Education Admin overstepping in the past that promoted Education Admins into Business Admin Posts where they were totally unqualified!
Education Admins have issues that are carryovers from weak leadership over the past decade.
The children need help now.
The district has a new Super now.(Thank goodness!)
The district has a new CFO now. (Thank goodness!)
As long as the Board gets (rightly) beat up for posturing and pandering and taking on issues that should have been demanded from past Superintendents, the new Admins (Educational and Business) can get to business the way they should.
The board has no business getting involved in day to day administration. But in order to pander, they enter the APS admin world as totally under-informed, ill-equipped, despots.
They (the board members) continue even today to attempt to meddle in the affairs of Administration and hiring. Dolores Griego: "The color of APS does not reflect the color of people that it serves." "I simply don't believe that the perspective of minorities can be addressed by anyone other than a minority." (Source:ABQjournal)

What's more important?
Effective Administration or Reflective Administration?

From Board Secretary Griego's point of view (and a few others), Reflective is more important than effective.
That's why there's SO MUCH WASTED TIME AND RESOURCE in APS.
Idiots.
Fire 'EM!!!
Fire the nitwits off the board!

Unknown said...

As a philisophy question, about the permisibility of any color of lie in public service, it makes a great moral conundrum.

Slippery is that slope, once taken the hike up to deception and denial plateau, and if you keep going, you can JUST SEE torture and brutality peak!

Rule of Law. So important for a functioning and responsive democracy. But the BAD guys play by no rules, so how do you fight that as a cop?

Subterfuge and cunning, in an interview strategy, is super important. You want you subject to be really uncomfortable so they can't lie coherently, can't think of ways to explain away crimes, to pin them on specifics so the lies unravel.

So, yes, Joseph Lopez has lied to suspected criminals, but not to the court. You explain in your narrative "I used a ruse to make the subject uncomfortable as they thought s/he would suffer mistreatment in jail or prison if he did not tell me where s/he had been the last twenty four hours" or whatever.